La signora che ha intervistato Msgr. Antonio Livi 1 non era a conoscenza della falsa premessa usata nell'interpretazione del Concilio Vaticano II dai vescovi liberali inglesi 2 , i due papi e anche Msgr. Livi e se stessa.
Altrimenti queste sono alcune delle domande rilevanti che lei potrebbe aver chiesto a lui. Gli avrei fatto queste domande in un'intervista, se l'avessi incontrato. Ma può darsi che non mi capisca. Per prima cosa dovrebbe essergli spiegata la teologia.
Poi avrei provato a vedere anche se mi avesse capito con queste domande. Le sue risposte a queste domande l'avrei postata come un'intervista.
1.Msgr. Livi, sei d'accordo che c'è un ragionamento irrazionale nella Lettera del Sant'Uffizio del 1949 (LOHO) che respinge il tradizionale extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS)? E questo ragionamento è responsabile per la falsa teologia dei papi che hai citato nella recente intervista con Gloria TV?
2. Non come i papi e dei santi del passato, mons. Livi consideri il battesimo del desiderio (BOD), il battesimo del sangue (BOB) e il fatto di essere salvato nell'ignoranza invincibile (I.I) come casi fisicamente invisibili ma come i teologi liberali nel 1949 e poi nel 1965, Msgr. Livi interpreterà BOD, BOB e I.I come persone conosciute, esempi fisicamente visibili di salvezza al di fuori della Chiesa.
3. Msgr. Livi non afferma più la vecchia ecclesiologia esclusivista della Chiesa poiché visibile per lui BOD, BOB e I.I sono delle eccezioni oggettive alla EENS tradizionale mentre non è la stessa per Lionel sul Blog di Lionel, perché? Qual è la differenza?
4. Msgr.Livi interpreta il Concilio Vaticano II come rottura con EENS da quando LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 ecc. si riferisce a persone conosciute, salvate al di fuori della Chiesa cattolica, anche quando non possono esserci persone così conosciute, d'accordo?
5. Questo è anche il ragionamento ufficiale irrazionale tra i liberali per eliminare il Sillabo degli Errori sul Vecchio Ecumenismo del Ritorno, l'Antica Teologia basata sull'invisibile per noi BOD, BOB e I.I, e la Vecchia Ecclesiologia che era esclusivista ed ecclesiocentrica. Questo fu il teologia di Msgr. Livi quando era professore all'Università San Giovanni Laterano a Roma.?
6. Msgr. Livi ha rifiutato dottrinalmente il dogma EENS e così anche in pratica (pastoralmente) agli incontri interreligiosi, alla catechesi per adulti, alle lezioni di Religione a scuola ecc., questa sarebbe stata la sua comprensione del Concilio Vaticano II, una rottura con EENS?
7. Per Msgr.Livi il Concilio Vaticano II non supporta il Sillabo degli errori sull'ecumenismo, le altre religioni, la salvezza esclusiva nella Chiesa cattolica ecc. Ma sul Blog di Lionel lo fa. Perché la differenza? Entrambi stanno leggendo lo stesso testo del Concilio Vaticano II e le interpretazioni sono diverse?
8.Msgr. Livi interpreta BOD, BOB e I.I (che il senso comune indica sono casi ipotetici) come riferito a persone visibili, salvate fuori dalla Chiesa, nei tempi presenti e quindi in questo modo è come la interpretazione di p. Hans Kung s.j, p. Karl Rahner s.j, P.Jacques Dupuis s.j e P. Joseph Ratzinger? Per loro e Msgr.Livi esistono delle eccezioni oggettive al tradizionale extra ecclesiam nulla salus e quindi il dogma definito da tre Concili della Chiesa è respinto dal Concilio Vaticano II? Dovrebbero esserci persone visibili per loro come eccezioni all'EENS? Ma questa non è l'interpretazione di Lionel?
9. Quindi, sulla teologia della salvezza, è chiaro che la dottrina è stata rifiutata e cambiata ufficialmente e questo non viene negato dai cardinali, eppure Msgr. Livi non commenta questo? Dal momento che fa lo stesso errore?-Lionel Andrades
English
Questions Mons.Livi should have been asked in the interview with Gloria TV
The lady who interviewed Monsgr.Antonio Livi 1was not aware of the false premise being used in the interpretation of Vatican Council II by the liberal English bishops 2, the two popes and also Monsgr. Livi and herself.
Otherwise these are some of the relevant questions she could have asked him. I would have asked him these questions in an interview, if I met him. But may be he would not understand me .First some background theology would have to be explained to him.
Then I would test to see also if he understood me with these questions.His answers to these questions I would have posted it as an interview.
1.Mons. Livi do you agree that there is an irrational reasoning in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) which rejects traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) ? And this reasoning is responsible for the false theology of the popes which you mentioned in the recent interview with Gloria TV ?
4. Mons.Livi interprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS since LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to known people, saved outside the Catholic Church, even when there cannot be any such known people, agreed?
5.This is also the official irrational reasoning among liberals to eliminate the Syllabus of Errors on the Old Ecumenism of Return, the Old Theology based on invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I and the Old Ecclesiology which was exclusivist and ecclesiocentric.This was the theology of Mons. Livi when he was a professor at the St.John Lateran University, Rome.?
6. Mons. Livi doctrinally has rejected the dogma EENS and so also in practise( pastorally) at interfaith meetings, catechesis for adults, Religion classes at school etc, this would be his understanding of Vatican Council II, a rupture with EENS?
7. For Mons.Livi Vatican Council II does not support the Syllabus of Errors on ecumenism, other religions,exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church etc but on Lionel's Blog it does.Why the difference? Both are reading the same Vatican Council II text and the interpretations are different?
8.Mons. Livi does interpret BOD, BOB and I.I (which common sense indicates are hypothetical cases) as referring to visible people, saved outside the Church, in the present times and so in this way is like Fr. Hans Kung s.j, Fr. Karl Rahner s.j , Fr.Jacques Dupuis s.j and Fr. Joseph Ratzinger ? This is assumed since for him there are objective exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so the dogma defined by three Church Councils is rejected by Vatican Council II ? There would have to be visible people for them to be exceptions to EENS ? But this is not the interpretation of Lionel ?
9.So on salvation theology it is clear that doctrine has been rejected and changed officially and this is not being denied by the cardinals and yet Mons. Livi does not comment on this ? Since he makes the same mistake? -Lionel Andrades
Otherwise these are some of the relevant questions she could have asked him. I would have asked him these questions in an interview, if I met him. But may be he would not understand me .First some background theology would have to be explained to him.
Then I would test to see also if he understood me with these questions.His answers to these questions I would have posted it as an interview.
1.Mons. Livi do you agree that there is an irrational reasoning in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(LOHO) which rejects traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) ? And this reasoning is responsible for the false theology of the popes which you mentioned in the recent interview with Gloria TV ?
2. So unlike the popes and saints of the past Mons. Livi do you consider the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as being physically invisible cases . Or instead, like the liberal theologians in 1949 and then 1965 you, Mons. Livi will interpret BOD, BOB and I.I as being known people, physically visible examples of salvation outside the Church.?
3. Mons. Livi no more affirms the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church since visible for him BOD, BOB and I.I are objective exceptions to traditional EENS while it is not the same for Lionel on Lionel's Blog, why ? What is the difference?4. Mons.Livi interprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS since LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc refer to known people, saved outside the Catholic Church, even when there cannot be any such known people, agreed?
5.This is also the official irrational reasoning among liberals to eliminate the Syllabus of Errors on the Old Ecumenism of Return, the Old Theology based on invisible for us BOD, BOB and I.I and the Old Ecclesiology which was exclusivist and ecclesiocentric.This was the theology of Mons. Livi when he was a professor at the St.John Lateran University, Rome.?
6. Mons. Livi doctrinally has rejected the dogma EENS and so also in practise( pastorally) at interfaith meetings, catechesis for adults, Religion classes at school etc, this would be his understanding of Vatican Council II, a rupture with EENS?
7. For Mons.Livi Vatican Council II does not support the Syllabus of Errors on ecumenism, other religions,exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church etc but on Lionel's Blog it does.Why the difference? Both are reading the same Vatican Council II text and the interpretations are different?
8.Mons. Livi does interpret BOD, BOB and I.I (which common sense indicates are hypothetical cases) as referring to visible people, saved outside the Church, in the present times and so in this way is like Fr. Hans Kung s.j, Fr. Karl Rahner s.j , Fr.Jacques Dupuis s.j and Fr. Joseph Ratzinger ? This is assumed since for him there are objective exceptions to traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so the dogma defined by three Church Councils is rejected by Vatican Council II ? There would have to be visible people for them to be exceptions to EENS ? But this is not the interpretation of Lionel ?
9.So on salvation theology it is clear that doctrine has been rejected and changed officially and this is not being denied by the cardinals and yet Mons. Livi does not comment on this ? Since he makes the same mistake? -Lionel Andrades
1
MAY 3, 2018
All the popes from John XIII have been promoting a heretical theology at Vatican Council II says Mons. Antonio Livi . He does not say that without a false premise the theology changes and then Vatican Council II automatically has the Old Theology and Old Ecclesiolgy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/all-popes-from-john-xiii-have-been.html
2.
MAY 3, 2018
On salvation theology it is clear that doctrine has been rejected and changed officially and this is not being denied by the cardinals and yet no one comments on this http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/05/on-salvation-theology-it-is-clear-that.html
https://gloria.tv/video/xZKemv4TKceC18ooNg6Yu1MCH
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment